![]() |
Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Printable Version +- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com) +-- Forum: Off Topic Forums (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums) +--- Forum: Politics & Religion 2.0 (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Politics-Religion-2-0) +---- Forum: P & R Archive (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-P-R-Archive) +---- Thread: Presidential Conflicts of Interest (/Thread-Presidential-Conflicts-of-Interest) |
RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - GMDino - 11-26-2016 Clearly this is a man we can trust, who will play by the rules, and will never self enrich himself while claiming to be doing good for others. Right? https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-foundation-apparently-admits-to-violating-ban-on-self-dealing-new-filing-to-irs-shows/2016/11/22/893f6508-b0a9-11e6-8616-52b15787add0_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation Quote:President-elect Donald Trump’s charitable foundation has admitted to the Internal Revenue Service that it violated a legal prohibition against “self-dealing,” which bars nonprofit leaders from using their charity’s money to help themselves, their businesses or their families. Right? RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Belsnickel - 11-29-2016 Apparently, the lease on his DC hotel may have to be renegotiated or terminated. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/29/503740464/law-professor-trump-cant-hold-lease-on-his-hotel-near-white-house Quote:After Donald Trump is sworn in as president on Jan. 20, he will follow a time-honored tradition and make his way from the U.S. Capitol down Pennsylvania Avenue. On top of that, using any of his properties for government business, whether federal or state business, could potentially be considered an emolument if there is payment for the use of the property. This is a potential breach of the Constitution (Article 2, Section 1, Clause 7). Expect a lawsuit to be filed by 13.00 on 20 January, 2017. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Benton - 11-29-2016 (11-29-2016, 05:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Apparently, the lease on his DC hotel may have to be renegotiated or terminated. http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/11/29/503740464/law-professor-trump-cant-hold-lease-on-his-hotel-near-white-house And most likely he'll sue and the case will drag on well beyond his term(s). It's going to be interesting when he's both the plaintiff and the defendant. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Belsnickel - 11-29-2016 (11-29-2016, 06:03 PM)Benton Wrote: And most likely he'll sue and the case will drag on well beyond his term(s). It's going to be interesting when he's both the plaintiff and the defendant. I forgot to add, that if a foreign government pays for the use of one of his properties, it could also be potentially unconstitutional thanks to Article 1, Section 9, which prevents foreign emoluments for all elected officials. Congress can provide permission for those, however. But there is no such stipulation for Congress to approve the emoluments from the federal or state governments. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Benton - 11-29-2016 (11-29-2016, 06:22 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I forgot to add, that if a foreign government pays for the use of one of his properties, it could also be potentially unconstitutional thanks to Article 1, Section 9, which prevents foreign emoluments for all elected officials. Congress can provide permission for those, however. But there is no such stipulation for Congress to approve the emoluments from the federal or state governments. I thought that pertained to granting of titles or gifts from foreign countries? It may be in there, but it's one of those things that hasn't been practiced in a while. Presidents (or other federal agents) weren't supposed to accept gifts from other countries, but it's happened going back to at least the 1800s. Gift giving, I'm not so sure how our presidents stack up. Trump will probably be the first president to give Russia anything, like, say, America. ![]() RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Belsnickel - 11-29-2016 (11-29-2016, 06:42 PM)Benton Wrote: I thought that pertained to granting of titles or gifts from foreign countries? Emoluments are nothing more than returns for holding an office. So if a foreign state, the federal government, or a state government, utilizes a Trump property because of his position as President once he takes office, then that could be viewed in the courts as an emolument. We can't get a ruling on this until he is inaugurated, though, as it does not become justiciable until that point. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - JustWinBaby - 12-02-2016 (11-26-2016, 10:58 AM)GMDino Wrote: Clearly this is a man we can trust, who will play by the rules, and will never self enrich himself while claiming to be doing good for others. It's HILARIOUS watching you worry about how an already multi-billionaire might enrich himself with politics when you so vigorously defended/denied the obvious corruption by which the Clintons made 100M+ OFF OF POLITICS. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - GMDino - 12-02-2016 (12-02-2016, 04:39 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: It's HILARIOUS watching you worry about how an already multi-billionaire might enrich himself with politics when you so vigorously defended/denied the obvious corruption by which the Clintons made 100M+ OFF OF POLITICS. I more worried about how the current system of such folks will continue to get richer while folks like me who have a job and work for a living will continue to get nowhere. What is funny is how you still think it is a fact that the Clintons are "corrupt" and still don't understand how they made their money after leaving office. But whatever helps you sleep at night. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Benton - 12-02-2016 (12-02-2016, 04:39 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: It's HILARIOUS watching you worry about how an already multi-billionaire might enrich himself with politics when you so vigorously defended/denied the obvious corruption by which the Clintons made 100M+ OFF OF POLITICS. Dirty, yes, but not really corruption. The money came from speaking fees. The speaking fees — most likely — are lobbying dollars. Which, as neither one of them are lawmakers, it would be tough to call that corruption. Abuse of the system, yes, but as their influence isn't really securing a vote or policy directly, there's not any bribery. Now, if she'd been elected, then that might be different as those past dollars should have come back to haunt her. But right now she's just an unemployed lady who bilked millions out of billionaires for services not rendered. And that is hilarious. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - JustWinBaby - 12-02-2016 (12-02-2016, 03:16 PM)Benton Wrote: Dirty, yes, but not really corruption. Fair enough. I'm just pointing out how certain posters had no problem with the Clinton's money machine, but are deeply concerned about a multi-billionaire who had easier and more effective options to further enrichment than running for POTUS. As for the Clintons, watch those speaking fees and charitable donations drop off a cliff (because, as you point out, it's effectively lobbying dollars...the difference being it goes to directly to their pockets rather than campaign funds). RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Belsnickel - 12-02-2016 (12-02-2016, 03:49 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Fair enough. I'm just pointing out how certain posters had no problem with the Clinton's money machine, but are deeply concerned about a multi-billionaire who had easier and more effective options to further enrichment than running for POTUS. The influence a POTUS wields over policy within this country and policy regarding how we deal with other countries is an extremely effective option for further enrichment, especially as there is no rule against presidential conflicts of interest since it is a constitutional office. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Benton - 12-02-2016 (12-02-2016, 03:49 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Fair enough. I'm just pointing out how certain posters had no problem with the Clinton's money machine, but are deeply concerned about a multi-billionaire who had easier and more effective options to further enrichment than running for POTUS. I don't think either of them had transparent, good interests for the majority of people. Both would/are paying back the people who got them there. As far as the bold, I dunno. Trump's business requires investors. He was already having to look outside the U.S. for money as his past mismanagement and banking regulations didn't bode well for him. Now he can help out industries or companies who might make things easier for his own company to find capitol. But I do agree that the foundation will most likely see a significant drop... until Chelsea announces her candidacy. Supposedly she's already trying to work her way into Congress. Ah, empires and their dynasties. She can compete against the Bush daughters ticket. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - GMDino - 12-02-2016 Oops. http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/19/donald-trump-profited-investment-carriers-parent-company/84593308/ Quote:Donald Trump profited from investment in Carrier's parent company "Drop in the bucket...but it's gonna be a lot of drops in a pretty yuge bucket." RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - GMDino - 12-02-2016 And they all trust the "con man". ![]() RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - JustWinBaby - 12-03-2016 (12-02-2016, 04:17 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The influence a POTUS wields over policy within this country and policy regarding how we deal with other countries is an extremely effective option for further enrichment, especially as there is no rule against presidential conflicts of interest since it is a constitutional office. LOL, no. Govt policy doesn't have a whole hell of a lotta impact on hotel revenues. You guys need to start thinking for yourselves. This isn't hard, you don't even have to have good business sense to have "common sense" in this case. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - JustWinBaby - 12-03-2016 (12-02-2016, 06:28 PM)Benton Wrote: I don't think either of them had transparent, good interests for the majority of people. Both would/are paying back the people who got them there. As far as the bold, I dunno. Trump's business requires investors. He was already having to look outside the U.S. for money as his past mismanagement and banking regulations didn't bode well for him. I was thinking more along the lines of he's already a 70-yr old multi-billionaire. He's won. The idea that he would subject himself to a longshot Presidential campaign, especially the time nevermind the tens of millions of dollars such a "greedy bastard" would be throwing at a longshot, to further enrich himself.....is just complete and total horse shit. If making a few hundred million more or whatever was that important, it's much easier and probably more effective to funnel that money to lobbying and kickbacks. If you want to tell me this is about ego, legacy and family dynasty (a.k.a Kennedy's) then I'm buying....anyone claiming this is to pad his wallet should honestly be embarassed for themselves. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - GMDino - 12-03-2016 (12-03-2016, 01:39 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: I was thinking more along the lines of he's already a 70-yr old multi-billionaire. He's won. The idea that he would subject himself to a longshot Presidential campaign, especially the time nevermind the tens of millions of dollars such a "greedy bastard" would be throwing at a longshot, to further enrich himself.....is just complete and total horse shit. If making more money is not important to the (alleged) billionaire why hasn't he stepped aside to let his children run the business already? Or done things like Bill and Melinda Gates have done? Instead he has a phony charity that he uses to buy himself stuff. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - GMDino - 12-03-2016 (12-03-2016, 01:34 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: LOL, no. Govt policy doesn't have a whole hell of a lotta impact on hotel revenues. it does when you own the hotels. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Belsnickel - 12-03-2016 (12-03-2016, 01:34 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: LOL, no. Govt policy doesn't have a whole hell of a lotta impact on hotel revenues. Umm, how do you figure? There are any number of policies that can influence hotel revenues, and that is not even taking into account the policies that he could use to directly influence government use of his properties. Yeah, I am thinking for myself on this one. This isn't something I need to read about to see the glaringly obvious concerns. There is no lack of common sense in my understanding of this, I know that much. RE: Presidential Conflicts of Interest - Dill - 12-03-2016 (12-02-2016, 04:17 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The influence a POTUS wields over policy within this country and policy regarding how we deal with other countries is an extremely effective option for further enrichment, especially as there is no rule against presidential conflicts of interest since it is a constitutional office. There are no effective conflict of interest laws at the moment because there has never been a president with so many potential conflicts. How will union conflicts with his hotels affect his labor policies? He owes money to the bank of China. He won't release his tax returns. But there are rules against gifts and bribes. And the perception of self-dealing could unite enough opposition in Congress to plug some of these apparent holes with legislation. Trump has some breathing space at the moment. No one is sure how to identify all the potential conflicts or how to hold him accountable for them. But he shows little interest in the kind of self-regulation important to previous presidents. Can he talk to any world leader without discussing building permits or tax breaks for his hotels? And I don't think he can let go of his Trump "empire" the way Obama could convert most of his assets to treasury bonds. So conflict is inevitable. And he doesn't handle pressure well, which will exacerbate matters. Also, I think he himself did not really think through these potential problems, or assumed he could manage them on the fly with smoke and mirrors, as he has done for much of his real estate business. In the next few months, I expect some ad hoc attempts to create an appearance of distance between himself and his business, and then use legal means to stall and deflect accountability as long as possible. |